Theists: what does your god want for you?

[catfish]

What have I missed?

That would depend on where you stopped reading. I'm assuming everything after where/when you determined that the "Christian God" was malevolent, violent and psychopathic...

[EGross]

This whole problem, where believers cherrypick what they like about their faith (Note Catfish' sig.), is that there is stuff that they all find weird or repugnant ("those who will not follow me, bring them before me and kill them"), so that goes into the "do not open" drawer of their mind. Then there is the stuff that they can agree with ("do unto others"), so that they polish and put on top of the box of their mind.

In short, I would say that most religious people would reject keeping every word of their dogma, and have, instead, created their personal dogma, filtering what they agree with as good and holy, and what they disagree with as irrelevant or "ignore that man behind the curtain".

It's like trying to get through a badly written book that you feel that you need to finish - it's crap. Let it go and move on.

[catfish]

This whole problem, where believers cherrypick what they like about their faith (Note Catfish' sig.), is that there is stuff that they all find weird or repugnant ("those who will not follow me, bring them before me and kill them"), so that goes into the "do not open" drawer of their mind. Then there is the stuff that they can agree with ("do unto others"), so that they polish and put on top of the box of their mind.

In short, I would say that most religious people would reject keeping every word of their dogma, and have, instead, created their personal dogma, filtering what they agree with as good and holy, and what they disagree with as irrelevant or "ignore that man behind the curtain".

It's like trying to get through a badly written book that you feel that you need to finish - it's crap. Let it go and move on.

In short, what you would say are simply words and have no control over reality...
Am I really cherrypicking? Or is that just the term used when someone fails at convincing another that they must believe every last word of the Bible?

[CleanShavenJesus]

Am I really cherrypicking? Or is that just the term used when someone fails at convincing another that they must believe every last word of the Bible?

Why do you have the power to say what is literal and what isn't? Why do you have the power to call yourself a Christian and a follower of the Bible and obey some things and not others?

[Ryantology]

What have I missed?

That would depend on where you stopped reading. I'm assuming everything after where/when you determined that the "Christian God" was malevolent, violent and psychopathic...

Is there more after the end? Did I miss some bonus content or deleted scenes?

[Whateverist]

Why do you have the power to say what is literal and what isn't? Why do you have the power to call yourself a Christian and a follower of the Bible and obey some things and not others?

I would have thought that everyone has the power to decide whether or not they are a Christian and to decide for themselves how to interpret each scripture, whether literally or otherwise.

What I object to is when one of them claims to know who else is a true Christian and how everyone must interpret their ancient book of Jewish fables.

[CleanShavenJesus]

Why do you have the power to say what is literal and what isn't? Why do you have the power to call yourself a Christian and a follower of the Bible and obey some things and not others?

I would have thought that everyone has the power to decide whether or not they are a Christian and to decide for themselves how to interpret each scripture, whether literally or otherwise.

The interpetations controdict each other. Hundreds of sects of Christianity, thinking that they're doing it right. But they don't know that. How could they? There's hundreds of other types of congregations doing something different, thinking they're right.

At this point, I'm shocked there's no sect that says the idea of God is allegorical.


Oh, quick question for catfish and jstrodel: do you think God is allegorical? Why or why not? Just the idea of God is equally ridiculous to the idea of a 6,000-year old Earth.

[Whateverist]

The interpetations controdict each other. Hundreds of sects of Christianity, thinking that they're doing it right. But they don't know that. How could they? There's hundreds of other types of congregations doing something different, thinking they're right.

At this point, I'm shocked there's no sect that says the idea of God is allegorical.

I think there are people who think God is allegorical and who call themselves Christians. There are probably some in every denomination except for the more rabidly fundamentalist ones.

The contradictions are not shocking. These would arise in a discussion of many different books. The readers of this particular book are especially challenged to reach agreement given that it's had many authors and revisions over time. It isn't truly one book so there is lots to disagree about. I have no problem with their lack of agreement, it is only the vehemence with which some of them defend their own interpretation that mark them as dipshits.

[jstrodel]

Oh, quick question for catfish and jstrodel: do you think God is allegorical? Why or why not? Just the idea of God is equally ridiculous to the idea of a 6,000-year old Earth.

Not sure what you mean by allegorical, God is a sentient spiritual being who communicates with people. To talk about God requires the use of language that typically does not come from sense experience and refers to human concepts that are symbolic of God's nature. God is not literally a king or a father and God's nature can be understood through using human concepts that have their origin ultimately in God. But the use of these concepts involves applying non-literal symbols to describe a God who is different from what humans experience.

Why is the idea of God ridiculous?

[Whateverist]

Not sure what you mean by allegorical, God is a sentient spiritual being who communicates with people. To talk about God requires the use of language that typically does not come from sense experience and refers to human concepts that are symbolic of God's nature. God is not literally a king or a father and God's nature can be understood through using human concepts that have their origin ultimately in God. But the use of these concepts involves applying non-literal symbols to describe a God who is different from what humans experience.

Well even if you disagree that God is best understood to be allegorical, you can probably make sense of how that might work. Someone happy in their church and its community might not literally believe in a personal god that intervenes in the world. They might actually think "god" refers to something like ones own better nature, within each one of us but not reducible to our conscious self or ego. That doesn't mean you have to think of God that way but why should anyone who does so stop calling themselves a Christian. Remember, no denomination owns the franchise right.